santana 30 or j30? - Page 6 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > On Board > Boat Review and Purchase Forum
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree4Likes
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #51  
Old 01-13-2012
Jeff_H's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,524
Thanks: 5
Thanked 85 Times in 65 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikieg View Post
what i saw was, there was a discussion. he provided input with references. someone did not like the input. now he is gone.
every forum has guys that know everything. usually there is some title under their avatar. if any person fractures their all knowing status, they get rid of that person.
of course this only works within a micro environment, one like a forum such as this. but out in the real world, this would not happen. i think i would put my money on the guy that had built thousands of boats over the last 60 years versus some johney come lately internet guru. but thats just my observation on what i can see from my house. prolly get banned for stating the obvious. some people are very insecure.
As my fellow moderator, Faster, noted, we do not discuss the specific details that form the basis for banning an individual member except with the member who was banned. This banning was due solely to rules violations and had nothing to do with the technical disagreements discussed above. It should be noted that all of the moderators and the site administrator reviewed the violations and unanimously agreed to the actions taken.

But I did want to discuss the technical matters on which there was a disageement and wanted to wait until all had posting priviledges restored and could respond. W.D.Schock disagreed with my characterization of fractional rigs as requiring smaller stays and shrouds, and also objected to my assertion that cored hulls are generally significantly stronger and stiffer than an equal weight non-cored hull. I thought it might be useful for me to explain why I believe my statements to be true and present this for an open discussion on these points.

REQUIRED SHROUD SIZES BEING SMALLER ON A FRACTIONAL RIG VS MASTHEAD RIG....
In terms of the fractional vs masthead rig discussion, When you actually calculate and compare the loads on rigging, you quickly become very aware that the diagonals of fractional rigs of this era (and most eras) tend to have a flatter angle than masthead rigs of that same era. To calculate the tension on a shroud, the side force load needs to be resolved through vectors into an axial force along the shroud. The steeper the angle of the diagonal, the higher the axial load relative to the horizontal load and because of that the axial tension load can easily be several times greater than the horizontal load.

So the typically flatter angles of the diagonals on a fractional rig means that the axial tension is significantly smaller relative to the side force involved. Again if the axila load is smaller on the shroud, there will be a smaller the axial compressive force imparted into the spar potentially allowing a relatively smaller cross sectional area spar section as well, and with smaller axial load, a smaller area spar section which can also tolerate more bend without buckling.

The smaller loads on fractional rig shrouds and stays also cumulatively result from a collection of other factors which include:

Actual forestay loads are proportionate to the overall the size of the headsail and are magnified by the catenary action of the forestay which in turn is impacted by the relative amount of forestay sag tolerated in the rig design.

While not so great for pointing ability, fractional rigs generally have a greater headstay sag relative to their headstay length. That greater sag (deeper catenary) means a smaller tension stress on the stay relative to the overal side force.

In addition to the load reduction due to proportionally greater sag in a fractional rig's headstay relative to a masthead rig, fractional rigs generally have smaller headsail area.

Since there is a substantially smaller forestay tensional load, the backstay has a smaller force to resist. But there is also a relatively large reduction in backstay loads on a fractional due to the leverage provided by the portion of the mast above the hounds. The larger mainsail, and threfore higher mainsheet forces also help reduce the force that the backstay is required to exert.

The cantilevering of the spar end above the hounds on a fractional rig adds one extra panel to the spar, and the ability to taper the end of a fractional rig spar more agressively due to smaller axial loads, allows the force distribution to more evenly match the section properties of the spar and greatly reduces the combined bending/axial unit load in the spar.

While not included in the shroud load calculations, the higher axial loads in a masthead rig, mean that less mast deflection can be tolerated and therefore, indirectly there is a tendancy to design masthead rig shrouds for less elongation than is tolerated in a fractional rig, which encourages the use of rod rigging for a similar sized load.

While it may be argued that the greater flexure in a typical fractional rig vs masthead, (especially during the period of the S30 and J30) is not all that great for pointing ability, it does have an impact on the rigging size requirement and contributes to the reason that masthead rigs need large shrouds.

Because it is more critical to control flexure in a masthead rig, shroud elongation becomes more of an important design criteria. The amount of elongation is determined by shroud length, and the proportion of load to the load capacity of the shroud material. Since masthead rigs have proportionately longer shrouds, have higher tension on their shrouds (as explained above), and tolerate less elongation, their shroud sizes on a masthead rig need to be larger. And all of this is the basis for my point about the rigging sizes needing to be larger on a masthead rig.

If you think I have any of this wrong, feel free to comment. I have placed it here in order to hear how and why.

STRENGTH OF CORED VS NON-CORED PANELS:
All other things being equal, for any given weight a cored panel will have significantly more bending strength and greater stiffness, and depending on the core material, will have similar if not greater sheer strength. The basic concept in this is that a cored hull behaves like a 'I' beam, with the skins acting as the flanges and the core acting as the web. In engineering terms the greater depth of the panel increases the section modulus and moment of inertia by increasing the depth between the axially loaded flanges of the member.

The only area where the question of relative strength of cored vs uncored sections is controversial is in puncture. There is not one universally right answer here because there are so many variables between how any given cored hull vs any give non-cored hull may be constructed, and these variables have a profound effect on the actual resistance of any hull to impact.

That said the current theory, which is supported in a number of published studies over the past decade or so, suggests that a cored hull still makes sense if you are designing a hull panel for impact. The operative theory is that while the outer skin of a cored hull may be more likely to be penetrated by a concentrated impact, this is offset in part by the core absorbing a percentage of the impact force, but more significantly the core will distribute the load to a larger area of the interior skin reducing the likelihood that the inner skin will be be breached. The real life reality of this theory, is heavily dependent on the core material, the bonding of the skin to the core, the amount of non-directional laminate in both panel designs.

Coring was also shown to be a factor in the percentage of strength retained over the life of the panel. As you may know, Fiberglass composites have a tendancy to lose a significant amount of strength and ductility over their service life due to flexural fatigue. The greater panel stiffness of a cored panel will generally result in less flexure and so less fatique. Similarly, all things being equal, the greater panel thickness of a cored panel means a lower unit load on the skin and so also less fatique.

Of course, where this theory breaks down is in cases where there has been core rot or the core loses its bond with the skins.

Respectfully,
Jeff
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay and part-time purveyor of marine supplies

Last edited by Jeff_H; 01-13-2012 at 06:23 PM.
  #52  
Old 01-13-2012
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern California
Posts: 649
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
WDS123 is on a distinguished road
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
jameswilson29 likes this.
  #53  
Old 01-14-2012
SloopJonB's Avatar
Senior Moment Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: West Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 10,613
Thanks: 56
Thanked 48 Times in 45 Posts
Rep Power: 4
SloopJonB will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDSchock View Post
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Welcome back, you naughty boy you.
jameswilson29 likes this.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I, myself, personally intend to continue being outspoken and opinionated, intolerant of all fanatics, fools and ignoramuses, deeply suspicious of all those who have "found the answer" and on my bad days, downright rude.
  #54  
Old 01-14-2012
blt2ski's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,653
Thanks: 0
Thanked 18 Times in 17 Posts
Rep Power: 10
blt2ski will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDSchock View Post
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Does this mean you is a she, not a HE! we need more SHE's posting frankly.........
__________________
She drives me boat,
I drives me dinghy!
  #55  
Old 01-22-2012
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: tulsa ok
Posts: 226
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
mikieg is on a distinguished road
welcome back Schock. i'll try to not make you speak truthful things that hurt the feelings of others.
  #56  
Old 02-05-2012
smackdaddy's Avatar
Last Man Standing
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 12,950
Thanks: 80
Thanked 72 Times in 66 Posts
Rep Power: 8
smackdaddy is a jewel in the rough smackdaddy is a jewel in the rough smackdaddy is a jewel in the rough
Great to see you back WD.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

S/V Dawn Treader - 1989 Hunter Legend 40
  #57  
Old 05-28-2012
SchockT's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,382
Thanks: 0
Thanked 22 Times in 21 Posts
Rep Power: 3
SchockT is on a distinguished road
Re: santana 30 or j30?

Well, I just stumbled across this thread...Interesting discussion! I think it is a bit of an odd comparison between boats of completely different eras; an IOR half-tonner originally designed in the early 70's (or late 60's even? Don't know when Turner actually started drawing the boat up.) Up against a J-boat that is clearly from a younger generation!

I do find it mildly concerning that a moderator would use his powers to edit another person's post and interject his own opinions. I am a moderator on another sailing site, and I would never DREAM of doing that! There it is considered an abuse of authority. But hey, I am new here, and if that is how this community likes it...so be it I guess.

The unfortunate side effect of such a policy is that I, as a late comer, do not get to hear what WDS123 has to say about the boat that I own. I honestly think that as long as the connection to the original manufacturer is declared, most of us can take statements made with the appropriate grains of salt! If someone, even a moderator, disagrees with their statements they are welcome to make their rebuttle in their own post. Using their powers as mod to squash someone's opinion hardly seems fair.

Just my humble opinion!

More on the Santana 30 later perhaps...now that I know WDS123 is an industry insider I would love to find out a few things about the design and construction of my boat. (when I am not supposed to be at work!)
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Santana 21 jhenn22 General Discussion (sailing related) 2 01-07-2009 09:42 PM
Santana 30/30 dpboatnut Boat Review and Purchase Forum 3 02-26-2004 06:58 PM
santana 20 gaha_1 Racing 1 04-30-2003 10:16 AM
santana 20 gaha_1 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 1 12-29-2002 06:45 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:10 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012